alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

301 Fannin, Room 245

Houston, Texas 77002

To: Chris Daniel February 11

, 2015

County: Harris (C riminal )

Subject: RETURN OF ORIGINAL EXHIBITS

Ple ase acknowled ge the receipt of the original exhibits listed below. Please sign and return

the original to this court.

14

- 09

- 00620

- CR Edgar Josias Vasquez v The State of Texas 1145289

State's Exhibit 5, a DVD

Received by: _______________________________________

_

Received on: ________________________________________
# C_2021062EN.01003201.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/32

---

Order of the General Court of 17 December 2020 — IM v EIB

(Case T-872/19) (1)

(Action for damages - Institutional law - Position of Chief Executive of the EIF - Vacancy notice - Rejection of the applicant’s application - Lack of autonomy of remedies - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 62/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: IM (represented by: D. Giabbani, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: T. Gilliams, G. Faedo and M. Loizou, acting as Agents, and by J. Currall and B. Wägenbaur, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant following the decisions of 3 and 9 October 2019 by which the EIB rejected his application for the position of Chief Executive of the European Investment Fund (EIF).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders IM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders IM to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.

---
# C_2019206EN.01009302.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/93 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/93

---

Action brought on 17 April 2019 — Jakober v EUIPO (Shape of a cup)

(Case T-262/19)

(2019/C 206/82)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Philip Jakober (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: J. Klink, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Three-dimensional EU trade mark (Shape of a cup) — Application for registration No 15 963 994

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 February 2019 in Case R 1153/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | amend the contested decision to the effect that the appeal is well founded and EU trade mark application No 15 963 994 may consequently be entered in the Register of the European Union Intellectual Property Office; |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the contested decision to the effect that the appeal is well founded and EU trade mark application No 15 963 994 may consequently be entered in the Register of the European Union Intellectual Property Office;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and/or Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and/or Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**1370 CA 13-01053** 
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND WHALEN, JJ.

JAY W. HANES, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROBERT N. NARRACCI, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

JOSEPH D. CALDWELL, NEW HARTFORD, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE GOLDEN LAW FIRM, UTICA (LAWRENCE W. GOLDEN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Herkimer County (Erin P. Gall, J.), entered December 31, 2012 in a personal injury action. The order denied the motion of defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he allegedly sustained when he slipped and fell down the exterior stairway of a building owned by defendant. Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant submitted evidence that, during the winter months, a gap between the roof and the gutter caused icicles to form and drip onto the stairway, resulting in the formation of black ice thereon. We reject defendant’s contention that he was entitled to judgment as a matter of law based upon plaintiff’s testimony at his deposition that he was “guessing it was black ice” that caused his fall ( see Godfrey v Town of Hurley , 68 AD3d 1527, 1527-1528; Belles v United Church of Warsaw , 66 AD3d 1470, 1471). Although plaintiff testified that he did not see or otherwise sense that there was black ice on the stairway before he fell, we conclude that defendant’s own submissions raised a triable issue of fact with respect to proximate cause ( see Belles , 66 AD3d at 1471). Contrary to his further contention, defendant failed to establish as a matter of law the merit of his alternative theory that the accident was caused by snow tracked onto the stairway in the treads of plaintiff’s boots ( see Higgins v Pope , 37 AD3d 1086, 1087). Inasmuch as defendant failed to meet his burden on the motion, there is no need to consider the sufficiency of plaintiff’s opposing papers ( see Gafter v Buffalo Med. Group, P.C. , 85 AD3d 1605, 1606). Entered: January 3, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
[No. 10230.

Department One.

August 16, 1912.]

#### Bank of Lind, *Appellant,*v. G. H. Thomas *et al.,*Respondents.1

Appeal from an order of the superior court for Adams county, Pendergast, J., entered November 27, 1911, dissolving an attachment, after a hearing before the court upon affidavits.

Reversed.

*Walcefleld & Witherspoon (A. C. Shaw*and *E. P. Twohy,*of counsel), for appellant.

*Lovell & Davis,*for respondents.

1

 Reported in 125 Pac. 776.

Pee Cueiam.

This is an appeal from an order dissolving an attachment. The facts involved are substantially the same as in *Holt Mfg. Co. v. Thomas, ante*p. 488, 125 Pac. 772, which we have just decided. For the reasons given in that decision, the order dissolving the attachment in this case is reversed.
# C_2022482EN.01001502.xml

| 19.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 482/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 482/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — Ferriere Nord v Commission

(Case T-667/19) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for concrete reinforcing bars - Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Fixing of prices - Limiting and controlling output and sales - Decision taken following the annulment of earlier decisions - New hearing held in the presence of the competition authorities of the Member States - Rights of the defence - Principle of sound administration - Reasonable period - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality - Ne bis in idem principle - Plea of illegality - Evidence of involvement in the cartel - Aggravating circumstances - Repeated infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Equal treatment - Unlimited jurisdiction)

(2022/C 482/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Ferriere Nord SpA (Osoppo, Italy) (represented by: W. Viscardini, G. Donà and B. Comparini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi, G. Conte and C. Sjödin, acting as Agents, and by M. Moretto, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: O. Segnana and E. Ambrosini, acting as Agents]

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for, primarily, annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4969 final of 4 July 2019 relating to a breach of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty (Case AT.37956 — Concrete reinforcing bars) or, in the alternative, a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ferriere Nord SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ferriere Nord SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Declares that the Council of the European Union is to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Declares that the Council of the European Union is to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.

---
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:94
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:95
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:96
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:97
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:98
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:99
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:100
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:101
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:102
Case: 1:02-cv-03002 Document #: 19 Filed: 10/30/02 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:103
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 28, 2010 

s0621 

Order 

 

June 28, 2010 

140692 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140692 

 COA: 287475 

Wayne CC: 07-024598-FH 

JOSEPH THOMAS PAUPORE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 12, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 YOUNG, J., not participating because he is closely acquainted with a relative of a 

party.
IIA 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 37 

To disapprove a rule promulgated by the Administrator of the Environmental 

Protection Agency relating to emission standards for certain steam generating units. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2012 

Mr. INHOFE introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

To disapprove a rule promulgated by the Administrator of 

the Environmental Protection Agency relating to emission standards for certain steam generating units. 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Ad4 ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency relat5 ing to national emission standards for hazardous air pol6 lutants from coal- and oil-fired electric utility steam gener7 ating units and standards of performance for fossil-fuel8 fired electric utility, industrial-commercial-institutional, 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 37 IS 

1 and small industrial-commercial-institutional steam gener2 ating units (77 Fed. Reg. 9304 (February 16, 2012)), and 

3 such rule shall have no force or effect. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darren P. Sickler, Appellant.

—Main, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Vogt, J.), rendered December 4, 1984, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of burglary in the second degree (three counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree (one count).

Defendant, while on bail and awaiting sentence on his plea of guilty to criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree, was indicted for several burglaries and was a prime suspect in others. When he appeared for sentencing on the criminal possession plea, negotiations were entered into and, as a result thereof, defendant pleaded guilty to three of the burglary indictments in full satisfaction of the remaining indictments and all pending charges. In accordance with the plea bargain, defendant was sentenced to 5 to 15 years’ imprisonment on each of the burglary charges and *2 Vs*to 7 years’ imprisonment on the criminal possession charge, with all sentences to run concurrently. Defendant appeals, contending that the plea was not a voluntary and knowing plea because of County Court’s inadequate instructions prior to accepting the burglary pleas and because of the court’s alleged threat of a more severe sentence if defendant was convicted following a trial. Defendant also maintains that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh and excessive.

*881Significantly, defendant failed to raise his objections to the adequacy of the plea allocution in County Court and, accordingly, has not preserved his claims for appellate review *(see, People v Pascale,*48 NY2d 997; *People v Vicks,*91 AD2d 1052). In any event, after review of the issues, we find no valid reason warranting reversal. Defendant’s claim that he was coerced is unfounded and belied by the record. As to the sufficiency of the colloquy, there is no requirement for a "uniform mandatory catechism of pleading defendants” *(People v Nixon,*21 NY2d 338, 353, *cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York,*393 US 1067). Under ordinary circumstances, a rigorous and detailed colloquy would be an unnecessary formalism *(supra).*No extraordinary circumstances are present here. Defendant was fully advised of his rights when he pleaded to the criminal possession charge and is surely no stranger to the criminal justice system. At sentencing, he readily admitted his guilt. He makes no protestation of innocence and was at all times represented by able counsel. We therefore perceive no basis for a conclusion that the plea was other than voluntary and knowing.

Lastly, no circumstances have been set forth to indicate that the sentence was other than appropriate, and we find no abuse of discretion on the part of County Court.

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J. P., Main, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 13.3

CERTIFICATION OF DR. WERNER BRANDT, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF SAP AG

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of SAP AG (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |        |  |                        
|------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date March 22, 2012 |  |  |  | By:    |  | /s/ Dr. Werner Brandt  
|                    |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Dr. Werner Brandt      
|                    |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
ex4_99.htm


    Exhibit 4.99

     

    
 

    
      


      First
Floor, Block 3, The Oval, Shelbourne Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin 4,
Ireland.

      Tel:  +353
(0) 1 669 9020   Fax:  +353 (0) 1 669 9028

      




    


    Letter
of Termination to Non Executive Directors

    


    


    


    Mr
Anthony Russell Roberts

    Non-Executive
Director

    


    October
09, 2009

    


    


    Dear
Anthony

    


    The Lead
Investors and Abingworth LLP require that you stand down from the board on
closing of the current financing transaction (the “Closing”). The Closing is
expected to occur on or around October 16th,
2009.

    


    As
previously advised, I am pleased to confirm that each retiring non-executive
director will be offered an option over 5000 Ordinary Shares per year of
service; such stock options to vest on Closing and will expire, unless otherwise
exercised, on June 30th, 2011.

    


    This is,
we believe, a fair and final settlement pursuant to your service on the Board of
Directors.  Can I conclude by thanking you for your service and
commitment to the Amarin Board over the past few years.

    


    


    


    Yours
sincerely

    


    


    /s/
Thomas G. Lynch

    Thomas
G. Lynch

    Chairman
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 990 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 51
112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 990

To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 12, 2011

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read the first 
                                  time

                              May 16, 2011

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF PROGRAMS 
              UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS 
              INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958.

    (a) In General.--Section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to extend 
temporarily certain authorities of the Small Business Administration'', 
approved October 10, 2006 (Public Law 109-316; 120 Stat. 1742), as most 
recently amended by section 1 of Public Law 112-1 (125 Stat. 3), is 
amended by striking ``May 31, 2011'' each place it appears and 
inserting ``May 31, 2012''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on May 30, 2011.
                                                        Calendar No. 51

112th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 990

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 16, 2011

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
<PAGE>



                                                                  Exhibit 23.1




             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS




5B Technologies Corporation
Woodbury, New York


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference to the Registration
Statements of 5B Technologies Corporation and Subsidiaries (the "Company") on
Forms S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-51864 and 333-33334) and Form S-8 (Registration
No. 333-40950), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, respectively,
of our reports dated March 16, 2001 on the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of the Company. appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2000.



BDO Seidman, LLP



Melville, New York
April  16, 2001
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          55,817
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,088
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,905
<PP&E>                                           9,726
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,740
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  66,390
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,938
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            19
<OTHER-SE>                                      54,479
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    66,390
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,930
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,357
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (568)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,859)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,859)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,859)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.38)
        

</TABLE>